brassmonkey

China is building military installations to cement its claims to most of the South China Sea and to back those claims if need be. Because the Trump administration, like its predecessor, rightly opposes this development, the chance of a military confrontation or incident is growing.

Meanwhile, Sino-American relations in general have soured over trade, possibly impairing the ability of leaders on both sides to manage such a crisis. Still, actual war between the two powers seems far-fetched: The stakes are not high enough, and the disputes not severe enough, to prompt leaders of either country to start a conflict outright.

Yet there is danger in complacency about the risk of war between the U.S. and China, owing to the growing likelihood of crises along with advances in military technology on both sides that can cause "crisis instability."

With improved long-range sensors and weapon accuracy, the conventional forces of each are increasingly able to target and strike those of the other. In a crisis, the inhibition toward war could give way to the impulse to gain advantage by striking first, even pre-emptively, before being struck. Thus, the test is not whether barriers against war are strong enough in peacetime but whether they would hold in time of crisis.

Of course, Chinese and American leaders could instantly intervene to stop a conflict before it got out of hand. But here, too, complacency would be a mistake. Because both sides have increasingly potent but vulnerable strike forces, there is an incentive to "use 'em or lose 'em" once hostilities began. A conflict could escalate swiftly and become even harder to stop.

A recent study issued by the Rand Corp. indicates that a significant fraction of U.S. surface-naval forces involved, including aircraft carriers, and an even greater fraction of Chinese forces could be destroyed early in a spiraling armed conflict.

Although the military balance in the Western Pacific still favors the U.S., this is shifting as China invests a major share of its growing military budget into "anti-access/area-denial" capabilities, like anti-ship missiles, designed to strike U.S. forces in the region.

Moreover, although the U.S. spends about three times what China does on military capabilities, China can concentrate on the Western Pacific, whereas the U.S. faces threats elsewhere, such as Russia, Iran and the Islamic State militant group (ISIS).

Although China's military disadvantage is shrinking, it would suffer immense harm-more than the U.S.-in the event of a war. Although the collapse of bilateral trade would damage both economies, virtually all of China's trade, being seaborne, would be disrupted by a war in the Western Pacific.

While U.S. gross domestic product could fall by 5 to 10 percent in the first year of a war, China's could fall by 25 percent or more. Because the Chinese regime's legitimacy depends on strong economic performance, political unrest could follow hardship.

What should American policy-makers do about this? Simply letting China gain de facto control over the South China Sea is unacceptable because of the vital importance of those waters, through which some 40 percent of world seaborne trade passes. Also, U.S. allies and others across the region would lose confidence in the U.S. if it fails to stand up to China.

Nor can the U.S. spend its way out of this predicament. An arms race in the Western Pacific would favor China because of its ability to concentrate investment both in the region and in capabilities that can target U.S. strike forces.

But there are steps U.S. leaders could take to reduce the danger. The Pentagon could develop, produce and deploy less vulnerable forces, such as submarines and drone carriers. Of course, it will take years to transform U.S. forces in the Western Pacific.

Meanwhile, given how perilous a Sino-U.S. crisis could be, U.S. leaders could also engage with their Chinese counterparts in search of a way to satisfy the interests of both powers, and others, in the South China Sea. This would be hard, take time and not necessarily succeed, given that China insists that most of this sea belongs to it.

What could be done now is to ensure that Washington and Beijing have a direct and active channel between the two defense ministers to defuse a crisis before the logic of striking first kicks in. This channel should remain open not only in a crisis but to prevent escalation if hostilities were to erupt.

Lastly, American and Chinese leaders should insist that their military commanders have options other than early and escalating strikes in the event of a war.

article...

__________________
EMAIL ==>[email protected] ==> #NOBIDEN2024
TRUMP 2024!!! | END DACA!!!! | HCR2060 <= ILLEGAL ALIENS!!!!...👮
=> TRUMPS PAYDAY!!!!... - Support The Laken Riley Act!!! - Trump Nobel Prize...

GFED

as someone stated in another thread; there will probably be a major market correction, or war.
so... i'd say 50/50.

__________________
https://www.flow.page/savethechildren

directfiesta

It would not be a "chance"

__________________
I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !

But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....

pimpmaster9000

the chances are exactly 0

this is how the convo would go:

trump: *autistic screeching

li ping jing ding: bitch google "chineese tourists at buffet" we send 10.000.000 of those in the first wave to countries around us...we have 200.000.000 ready to march and surrender enjoy feeding them...

trump: noooooooooooooooooo!

li ping ding: raugh! the communist party owns you bitch...in your face! communist party of china RULEZ! in your face capitalist pussy ass bitch...suck my tiny asian commie penis...bitch! (this is the exact wording he would use)

__________________
Report a suspicious cracker: Click Here

LovinNothin

It is 100% inevitable that China will take over the entire planet.

It may take 300, 400, or even 1000 years, but they will.

It's simple evolution of the species.

China has more people, more money, and one day soon, much more power than any other country in the world.

They are the true super power with the sheer incredible volume of fresh human souls to back up their military.

After the US implodes from financial ruin, which we are well on the way and nothing can stop it...
All we'll have left here in the States are bloated obese diabetic Americans that complain that their iphones are too slow and there low sugar sodas taste like crap. Yeah, we're a real super power.

Do you know why officials decided to let women join the military?
It's because a large % of male new recruits could not pass the basic physical exam to join the army!!! Too fat to fight. So, we fill in the gaps with women.

Really sad and pathetic that we now need women to help fight our battles. Not just allow, but NEED woman in the military.

What a country.

Bladewire

__________________

Joshua G

im not understanding why the US must prevent china from controlling their own regional turf. Would the USA like it for china to come out to north atlantic & start telling USA what they can & cant do?

is china trying to claim an international shipping route as their own? i cant tell, reading our liberal media that always tells us to hate russia, hate china, hate trump.

this is why the media utterly fails in the USA. they dont report important facts.

Steve Rupe

They do report but one has to decipher for themselves because there are almost always different viewpoints/different shades of gray.

Steve Rupe

Pretty much zero chance, now or ever.

Bladewire

Anything is possible

__________________

INever

The commie chinese might take over the world. After they learn how to parallel park.

By the way, the war is already on. Cyber and who do you think is trying to fuck up our friendship with Russia? Hint: Hillary sat on Wal-mart's board 86-92